In re: Schafler, 10-1995 (2010)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: 10-1995
Visitors: 63
Filed: Oct. 14, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1995 In Re: PEPI SCHAFLER, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Submitted: September 30, 2010 Decided: October 14, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Pepi Schafler, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Pepi Schafler has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus requesting that the
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1995 In Re: PEPI SCHAFLER, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Submitted: September 30, 2010 Decided: October 14, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Pepi Schafler, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Pepi Schafler has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus requesting that the ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1995 In Re: PEPI SCHAFLER, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Submitted: September 30, 2010 Decided: October 14, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Pepi Schafler, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Pepi Schafler has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus requesting that the court recall its mandate in case No. 09-2298. We have reviewed the record and find that Schafler is not entitled to the relief requested. Accordingly, we deny the petition. We also deny Schafler’s motion to seal documents and her motion to strike. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 2
Source: CourtListener
